Urban, [U] wrote: U> In that case the person who gets the table can do something that is U> _much_ better: (S)he can tell the sender that doing tables like that U> isn't necessarily a good thing and show him or her a better alternative.
.. the same can apply for the emoticon issue. In fact the emoticon issue is more easily solved. U> Normally, yes, and I shouldn't mess with the settings that _they_ U> want, I don't want to either. What I want is simply a way to make U> TB know that /this particular message/ contains smilie shortcuts U> that should be rendered as text. You cannot influence how your messages will be rendered by the receiving client. That's up to the client and the users settings. You can minimize problems but you can't totally eliminate them. U> I haven't said that emoticons are necessarily a bad thing that shouldn't U> be, so I don't deny anyone anything. What I have said, however, is that U> the way it works in TB now isn't good because it denies the sender U> control of what the first impression of the mail sent will be. It can be disabled permanently or via a toggle switch (right click in the viewer and select 'Smileys'). If the user finds an emoticon strangely placed, as I do at times, (s)he simply toggles off the smileys. I've done this for a few messages already. U> If I select another message encoding, I'll get a visual feedback U> (although it seems to be true only for non-ASCII characters). If I U> write :-) while composing, even the HTML-editor will only show me U> "colon-dash-right parenthesis" without any clue whatsoever that it U> might be converted to a emoticon. Of course, since emoticons aren't a part of HTML. -- -=[ Allie ]=- (List Moderator and fellow end-user) PGPKeys: http://key.ac-martin.com Running The Bat! v2.11.02 on WinXP Pro (SP1)
pgpLVPCZCHwyk.pgp
Description: PGP signature
________________________________________________ Current version is 2.11.02 | 'Using TBUDL' information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
